2018 Conference

Individual Paper Presentation

According to the U.S. Forest Service, prior to fire suppression in the 1900s, ponderosa and mixed-conifer forests in the Sierra Nevada Mountains of California were shaped primarily by low- and moderate-severity fire. High-severity fire was rare in these forests, accounting for only 5-10 percent of a burned area. According to the agency, Sierra Nevada forests are currently more susceptible to high-severity fire due to decades of fire suppression, the buildup of flammable materials, and climate change. High-severity fire is considered highly destructive, and a threat to the viability of California spotted owls and other species. The Forest Service is currently engaged in efforts to “restore” these forests through salvage logging, planting conifer seedlings, forest thinning, and other treatments intended to provide wildlife habitat and greater resistance to high-severity fire.

As I will discuss in this theoretical contribution, each aspect of this agency paradigm has been challenged within the scientific literature. There is much controversy. There is compelling evidence that historically high-severity fire played an ecologically important role in Sierra Nevada forests, and that high-severity fire is, in fact, significantly less frequent now than it was historically. In addition, scientists argue that spotted owls are well adapted to fire that is of mixed severity, including a significant percentage of high-severity fire, and that the owls are generally able to adjust to the occurrence of high-severity fire within their territories. Scientists warn, rather, of impacts on spotted owls from salvage logging and other agency actions that degrade habitat. It is widely recognized that spotted owls are in decline on national forest lands in the Sierra Nevada, and experts have identified forest management as a primary cause of these declines. I will argue that a more balanced assessment of the current scientific literature supports a less intrusive forest management policy.